[85449] in tlhIngan-Hol
Re: Klingon Ad for my new novel!
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Christopher Fulkerson, Ph.D.)
Sat May 16 16:48:39 2009
In-Reply-To: <4A0F243C.1040700@trimboli.name>
Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 13:47:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Christopher Fulkerson, Ph.D." <christopher@christopherfulkerson.com>
To: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Errors-to: tlhingan-hol-bounce@kli.org
Reply-to: tlhingan-hol@kli.org
Would someone please take my name off of this mailing list - I don't know
who in particular to write to.
Thank you,
Christopher Fulkerson
**************
On Sat, May 16, 2009 1:38 pm, David Trimboli wrote:
> Dr. Lawrence M. Schoen wrote:
>> ghItlh Doq:
>>> DubtaHba' tlhIngan Hol laHlIj.
>>
>> Clearly your suffix order error has been included as a test.
>>
>> Personally, I don't like N-N-N constructions. They feel clunky to me.
>> I'd have recast this as a complex sentence, thusly:
>>
>> tlhIngan Hol lo'meH Dubba'taH laHlIj.
>>
>> Or something similar. Of course, I am not one of the grammarians, and
>> there may be other errors creeping in that I fail to see.
>
> "Your ability obviously continues to improve in order for it to use
> Klingon." A purpose clause is the wrong tool here.
>
> Overly long genitive constructions are poor style, but /tlhIngan Hol/ is
> so common as to seem a single unit; it does not overburden the genitive
> construction.
>
> --
> David Trimboli
> http://www.trimboli.name/
>
>
>
>
